How Senator Flake played Senator Coons for a fool

https-_cdn-cnn-com_cnnnext_dam_assets_180927132846-29-kavanaugh-ford-unfurled

 

Doubt wrinkled Flake's brow  like the skin of old prunes;

And he reached 'cross the aisle to a friend and he told  him.

"Let the FBI in on this, Senator Coons."

Who  trusted this lie which Flake fashioned and sold him.

 

38c80016-909f-45ad-ac75-864150e358d6-ap18275580453958

Comments

Leave a comment
  • The real question is why doesn't FNC realize that there are 3 Republicans running for Senate in W Va? And why hasn't Schumer kicked one of them out of his caucus?

  • Also, I don't think Flake lied. The original agreement was for a limited FBI investigation to be completed within a week. While the text of the FBI's report apparently has a higher security level than the nuclear launch codes, the purpose of the investigation was to satisfy senators such as Collins and Flake. Both said there was nothing disqualifying there, so the report satisfied Flake's purpose. He never assured Coons that he would vote no.

    In light of my observation in the prior comment, it would have taken 2 more real Republicans to flip to kill this.

  • In reply to jack:

    One can lie with words or with actions. In my opinion Flake's effort to delay the vote was half-hearted because he gave away his clout by first voting for cloture before insisting on a further FBI investigation that turned out to barely scratch the surface for facts, which Flake then accepted as legitimate. He could have at that point held firm and perhaps McConnell would have been more hesitant to plow through. Flake's Fabian tactics to a degree contributed to the ramping up of fervor in the Republican base.

  • In reply to Aquinas wired:

    He did not vote on Sept 28 for cloture. He voted then to discharge it from committee, but then had the deal to put off putting it on the Senate floor for one week.

    As far as barely scraping, he said it was supposed to be a limited investigation.

    The cloture vote in the Senate was on Oct. 5, and by then both Flake and Collins said they were voting yes. I don't know what was Murkowski's maneuver, but it was apparently some way to neutralize her purported no vote.

    I understand (and somewhat supported) the Democrat view of stringing this along enough that Trump couldn't get another nominee through, but Flake and Collins never subscribed to that.

    And very few people on both sides had any interest in Kavanaugh's jurisprudential position; the whole exercise for the past month was to ramp up both bases. Also, as I noted on HHH, there was no way the FBI could have proven that someone was felt up 35 years ago. I noted there that I don't know what Flake's motivation was, but he gave the Senate Republicans a fig leaf they accepted. And, as I implied above, I don't know why the investigation report was classified as "top secret."

  • In reply to jack:

    Thanks, Jack. I stand corrected...that is, I sit corrected [at the computer]. But my position on Flake is unchanged.

Leave a comment